United States Third Circuit

Mills v. Maryland, 486 U.S. 367 (1988), did not announce a new rule of constitutional law for purposes of retroactivity, thus application of Mills on habeas review of a sentence was completely proper.

Appellate Information

• Argued 04/02/2001
• Decided 01/14/2003
• Published 01/14/2003

Judges

• Before: SLOVITER, ROTH and RENDELL, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Third Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Albert J. Flora, Jr., [Argued], Wilkes-Barre, PA, William Ruzzo, Kingston, PA, for Appellant, George E. Banks., Peter Goldberger, Law Office of Peter Goldberger, Ardmore, PA, for Amicus-Appellant, PA Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers., Louis M. Natali [Argued], Turner & McDonald, Philadelphia, PA, for Amicus-Appellants, PA Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and Louis M. Natali.


• For Appellees:
  
• Scott C. Gartley [Argued], David W. Lupas, Office of District Attorney, Luzerne County Courthouse, Wilkes-Barre, PA, for Appellee, Commonwealth of PA.